[CountSessine]

Why?

As a non-American, I would much rather have the US in that role than any other country in the world. In diplomacy and international relations the United States has conducted itself with fairness and honour, and is generally regarded outside of her borders as an honest broker.

If you want to know what the world would look like without a strong, democratic, law-abiding nation as supreme military power, read up on recent news about the South China Sea and the 11-dash line. Look at the honesty and even-handedness with which America has approached border disputes with it's neighbours, and then look at what Japan, Vietnam, and the Phillipines are up against. In the world view of China's leaders, the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.

[finid]

> In diplomacy and international relations the United States has conducted itself with fairness and honour, and is generally regarded outside of her borders as an honest broker.

That's an excellent propaganda piece. You deserve a medal for that.

> If you want to know what the world would look like without a strong, democratic, law-abiding nation as supreme military power, read up on recent news about the South China Sea and the 11-dash line.

You can say that because your country has not been invaded by US and the "international community", or the "Coalition of the Willing", to get rid of your government - by all means necessary. Assad of Syria, Saddam and Muammar Gaddafi will no doubt disagree with your characterization of the US as a "law-abiding nation". Ditto for many South American countries.

[digdigdag]

> As a non-American, I would much rather have the US in that role than any other country in the world. In diplomacy and international relations the United States has conducted itself with fairness and honour, and is generally regarded outside of her borders as an honest broker.

The following groups or countries may argue otherwise - Sandinista National Liberation Front - Cubans - Certain Arab countries - Mexico - Pacific Islanders - Certain North African nations - Certain Central African nations - The Cherokee Nation - Certain Far East nations

[794CD01]

In diplomacy and international relations, the US has killed countless civilians, used nuclear weapons, launched unjustified invasions of other countries, deposed democratically elected foreign leaders for opposing American interests, and to this day spies on everyone we possibly can. Maybe you're the one who should do some more reading. Or at least watch a movie.

If you think the US has behaved better than other countries, that's reasonable. But that's not the same as behaving well. And a far cry from behaving well enough to be entrusted with "supreme military power".

[CountSessine]

In diplomacy and international relations, the US has killed countless civilians

The United States has also conducted at least 4 wars since the end of World War II; should America be condemned for not having smart bombs in the Korean war?

, used nuclear weapons

...to end World War II and save countless lives, US and Japanese, by avoiding an invasion of Japan. Just the fact that the US was able to end the horrible incendiary bombing of Japanese cities and force Japan's truculent leaders into immediate surrender argues that the use of nuclear weapons in World War II saved far more lives than it cost.

But historical revisionism wins out against lost memories of the worst war ever fought and only barely won.

, launched unjustified invasions of other countries, deposed democratically elected foreign leaders for opposing American interests

The United States is tremendously powerful, and yet generally acts with restraint. And would the world have been better off if more countries had allied themselves with the Soviet Union?

, and to this day spies on everyone we possibly can.

If American power and influence has created a world so stable and peaceful that there are Polly-Annas who believe that espionage isn't universal and endemic among all nations, then that is a very good thing in my opinion.

But that's not the same as behaving well. And a far cry from behaving well enough to be entrusted with "supreme military power".

Nature and international relations abhors a vacuum; no one 'entrusted' the United States to the role they now occupy. Would you be happier if China filled this vacuum?

[kuschku]

> I would much rather have the US in that role than any other country in the world

You would rather see people like Trump gain the power over that, than a possible future federated Europe?

[CountSessine]

You would rather see people like Trump gain the power over that, than a possible future federated Europe?

I would take Donald Trump or anyone currently involved in Federal US politics over Xi Xinping or Vladimir Putin. Is that what you're asking?

And a federated Europe is now a given. Brexit is an existential challenge for Europe; with federation's most vocal opponent now out and with the fundamental moral hazard of endless Greek bail-outs still an issue, the EU will federate or eventually dissolve.